Are You Kidding Me?

#1
rexvol

rexvol

The Minister of Defense
Joined
Apr 29, 2006
Messages
18,124
Likes
54
#1
From govolsxtra:
"Coach Fulmer is a very loyal guy. He believed in Coach Clawson. He believed that he was gonna be given a second chance, that the system would be given a second chance. It's unfortunate that things didn't turn out that way."
Click to expand...

Is he saying that if Phil hadnt been canned that Clawson was coming back? On a side note, Is Josh Bricoe ever going to shut up?
 
#3
#3
rexvol said:
Is he saying that if Phil hadnt been canned that Clawson was coming back? On a side note, Is Josh Bricoe ever going to shut up?
Click to expand...

I'm not sure....Did you listen to that whole conversation? He was bashing the Hell out of Clawson, but he said something along the lines of Clawson said he needed two years for his offense to be good.

He also said Clawson's offense was not good, because they had to think! LOL
 
#4
#4
I think Clawson's system could have worked. But PF has used all of this "next year" chips up.
 
#6
#6
Goliver24 said:
but he said something along the lines of Clawson said he needed two years for his offense to be good.
Click to expand...

hohenfelsvol said:
I think Clawson's system could have worked. But PF has used all of this "next year" chips up.
Click to expand...

Blame whomever you choose, but to believe that next year's offense would have been "good" with the same coaches, players, and schemes is to believe in unicorns.
 
#9
#9
cotton said:
Blame whomever you choose, but to believe that next year's offense would have been "good" with the same coaches, players, and schemes is to believe in unicorns.
Click to expand...

If CPF would have allowed Clawson to name his starters that actually fit into his offense we would have been bowl eligible.

But he didn't and Phil is gone because of it.
 
#10
#10
VolSwaff said:
If CPF would have allowed Clawson to name his starters that actually fit into his offense we would have been bowl eligible.

But he didn't and Phil is gone because of it.
Click to expand...

1. The offense this year was an abject, miserable failure, whether it was the starters, the other starters, or the other-other starters bungling it. The only thing that actually worked was the "don't throw ever" philosophy employed against Kentucky and Vanderbilt.

2. Any head coach that allows his assistants to pick starters without any oversight does not deserve the title of head coach.

3. I very carefully avoided any blame in my original post because that wasn't the topic I wanted to address. I stick by my statement: this offense would have sucked next year, too. Since every single position got worse this year than last, and it actually seemed to get worse game after game as the season went on, I can only cringe at the thought of how miserable it would have been with another year to blossom. Blame Phil and blame Crompton; they certainly deserve it. But to give a pass to the guy in charge of the O is absurd.
 
#11
#11
VolSwaff said:
If CPF would have allowed Clawson to name his starters that actually fit into his offense we would have been bowl eligible.

But he didn't and Phil is gone because of it.
Click to expand...

yeah, i think that's true. at least we would have been more competitive. i think fulmer had his loyalist players and stuck with them to the end.

remember last year, what it took to get Berry on the field. everyone was screaming and screaming for phil to start Berry and he finally did.
 
#12
#12
cotton said:
Blame Phil and blame Crompton; they certainly deserve it. But to give a pass to the guy in charge of the O is absurd.
Click to expand...

Did it never occur to you that there may have been something to Lennon Creer being given the ball every time he was in the game(The William Howard like drive that finished the UAB game for example).

Clawson was handcuffed to Fulmer's favorites and it took him Crompton's performance in the AU game to unseat a single offensive starter.
 
#13
#13
VolSwaff said:
If CPF would have allowed Clawson to name his starters that actually fit into his offense we would have been bowl eligible.

But he didn't and Phil is gone because of it.
Click to expand...

Pure conjecture
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#14
#14
I think Clawson is a very good coach and would have succeeded given enough time at UT. But as someone said, CPF had used all of his next year chips up.

It is hardly Clawson's fault that the talent at WR had dropped off to the degree it had.

I wonder if some here will be any more patient with the new staff?
 
#15
#15
joevol320 said:
yeah, i think that's true. at least we would have been more competitive. i think fulmer had his loyalist players and stuck with them to the end.

remember last year, what it took to get Berry on the field. everyone was screaming and screaming for phil to start Berry and he finally did.
Click to expand...

Berry made a good enough case for himself for a starting job. It had nothing to do with some fans screaming on a message board.
 
#16
#16
VolSwaff said:
Did it never occur to you that there may have been something to Lennon Creer being given the ball every time he was in the game(The William Howard like drive that finished the UAB game for example).

Clawson was handcuffed to Fulmer's favorites and it took him Crompton's performance in the AU game to unseat a single offensive starter.
Click to expand...

I just don't understand how you can take a pretty good offense, return everyone except the quarterback and the OC, have it completely flounder, and not think the OC had anything to do with that.

It doesn't matter anymore; both Clawson and Fulmer have been put to pasture, and that is probably for the best.
 
#17
#17
sjt18 said:
I think Clawson is a very good coach and would have succeeded given enough time at UT. But as someone said, CPF had used all of his next year chips up.

It is hardly Clawson's fault that the talent at WR had dropped off to the degree it had.

I wonder if some here will be any more patient with the new staff?
Click to expand...
This is the SEC, you don't have a lot of time to get good. There is a difference in being marginally effective and totally ineffective offensively. I think if our offense was marginally effective, Clawson and Phil would still be here and we would have won several more games (UCLA, Wyoming, and Auburn come to mind)

We will be patient with the new staff, but expectations are an above .500 season. Less than that will be disappointing.
 
#19
#19
If he had stuck with Crompton we would have been in a BCS bowl and Phil would have kept his job. I thank the gods that Crompton decided to by-pass the NFL and come back for his senior year and a chance at glory.
 
#21
#21
Clawson was handcuffed but he contributed to this season's demise as well. I would, however, like to see how he would have done with out Fulmer making him do things the Fulmer way...same thing happened at Auburn; nobody let Franklin do his thing before everybody gave up on the idea.
 
#23
#23
cotton said:
Blame whomever you choose, but to believe that next year's offense would have been "good" with the same coaches, players, and schemes is to believe in unicorns.
Click to expand...

Are you saying unicorns aren't real. Some people have to ruin it for everyone.
 
#24
#24
poncharello said:
Are you saying unicorns aren't real. Some people have to ruin it for everyone.
Click to expand...

Sometimes you have to believe before you can see...


rainbow-unicorn.jpg
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top